Cap1 & CCA return

[tamadus]

Thats only for cards and loans etc taken out when the new regs come in it's not retrospective.

 

I know it's not retrospective Terminator, but imagine the scenario of somebody applying online for a loan and being classed as signing it by entering something as simple as an email address.

 

We have discussed at great length the possibility of unscrupulous lenders using old and 'unused' application form to try and enforce agreements. Now we have the additional problem of them creating accounts for any online application and using the same electronic signature as verification of the agreement.

 

It is not beyond the wit of man to actually gain access to almost anybodies email box, download the appropriate emails and prevent them getting to the rightfull owner, thus they can reply to them as if they are the owner.

 

That scares me a lot more than an application form (with the statutory parts) being used for a double purpose as the major part of an agreement

[Guest The Terminator]

I know it's not retrospective Terminator, but imagine the scenario of somebody applying online for a loan and being classed as signing it by entering something as simple as an email address.

 

We have discussed at great length the possibility of unscrupulous lenders using old and 'unused' application form to try and enforce agreements. Now we have the additional problem of them creating accounts for any online application and using the same electronic signature as verification of the agreement.

 

It is not beyond the wit of man to actually gain access to almost anybodies email box, download the appropriate emails and prevent them getting to the rightfull owner, thus they can reply to them as if they are the owner.

 

That scares me a lot more than an application form (with the statutory parts) being used for a double purpose as the major part of an agreement

 

I agree with what your saying there Tam obviously the person who dreamt it up didn't think of the implications, for instance fraud.And as you say by simply adding an email address it could be classed as being signed.

[tamadus]

ok I need to quote the bit that says a company cannot profit while in default. Does anybody know EXACTLY where it is ? I need it fast for a BIG claim going into Barclaycard this weekend and I dont really have the time to troll through CPA,CCA etc etc right now

[me_n_my_kids]

if you were to cca bank regarding an overdraft and there was no agreement, would that become unenforceable? its still lending with no agreement?

[un1boy]

ok I need to quote the bit that says a company cannot profit while in default. Does anybody know EXACTLY where it is ? I need it fast for a BIG claim going into Barclaycard this weekend and I dont really have the time to troll through CPA,CCA etc etc right now

 

 

Hi Tam,

 

Is this what you're looking for (from the CCA):

________

78 Duty to give information to debtor under running-account credit agreement

 

(1) The creditor under a regulated agreement for running-account credit, within the prescribed period after receiving a request in writing to that effect from the debtor and payment of a fee of £1, shall give the debtor a copy of the executed agreement (if any) and of any other document referred to in it, together with a statement signed by or on behalf of the creditor showing, according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer,—

 

(a) the state of the account, and

 

(b) the amount, if any, currently payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor, and

 

© the amounts and due dates of any payments which, if the debtor does not draw further on the account, will later become payable under the agreement by the debtor to the creditor.

 

 

(2) If the creditor possesses insufficient information to enable him to ascertain the amounts and dates mentioned in subsection (1)©, he shall be taken to comply with that paragraph if his statement under subsection (1) gives the basis on which, under the regulated agreement, they would fall to be ascertained.

 

(3) Subsection (1) does not apply to—

 

(a) an agreement under which no sum is, or will or may become, payable by the debtor, or

 

(b) a request made less than one month after a previous request under that subsection relating to the same agreement was complied with.

 

 

(4) Where running-account credit is provided under a regulated agreement, the creditor shall give the debtor statements in the prescribed form, and with the prescribed contents—

 

(a) showing according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer, the state of the account at regular intervals of not more than twelve months, and

 

(b) where the agreement provides, in relation to specified periods, for the making of payments by the debtor, or the charging against him of interest or any other sum, showing according to the information to which it is practicable for him to refer the state of the account at the end of each of those periods during which there is any movement in the account.

 

 

(5) A statement under subsection (4) shall be given within the prescribed period after the end of the period to which the statement relates.

 

(6) If the creditor under an agreement fails to comply with subsection (1)—

 

(a) he is not entitled, while the default continues, to enforce the agreement; and

 

(b) if the default continues for one month he commits an offence.

 

 

(7) This section does not apply to a non-commercial agreement, and subsections (4) and (5) do not apply to a small agreement.

____________

 

Sorry it's not as quick as you may ahve needed -only just seen the email!

[un1boy]

if you were to cca bank regarding an overdraft and there was no agreement, would that become unenforceable? its still lending with no agreement?

 

I'm not sure mate, I would have thought not. However it would be best using a DPA request, as a CCA request would be inappropriate....if they can;t provide the original app with your request, try challenging them and see what they say.

[meagain]

if you were to cca bank regarding an overdraft and there was no agreement, would that become unenforceable? its still lending with no agreement?

 

Yes and/or no.

 

It's a bit of a grey area, though overdrafts with a set limit are specifically identified in the CCA as an example of running-account credit. Your bank might say it's definitely not regulated by CCA, but what do they know?

[un1boy]

meagain, I think he was meaning if they cannot provide any proof of an agreement, even an application form!

[meagain]

Is that not the question I just gave the non-committal "yes and/or no" answer to then?

[un1boy]

lol, ah i see, I thought you were referring to the credit agreement to be supplied under the CCA request!

[meagain]

(edited out from previous post since a reply appeared before it was edited in *sigh*)

 

If it turns out to be not regulated and not subject to the provisions of S78, then the debt might not be barred after around 6 weeks if they later manage to locate your original application. Just needs to be considered. Erring on the side of caution and all that.

[un1boy]

Absolutely

[tamadus]

Thanks Un1 but thats not the bit I was looking for

 

I seem to recall that somewhere there is something that clearly states they cannot profit while in default. I know they can't enforce it but I need to quote the bit about profiting from unlawful activity. This is need to justify my rather large claim to Barclaycard.

[meagain]

Of course, an entirely random thought is to add a request for specific performance in writing off the debt to a charges claim against a defaulting creditor Not sure how this would go down, but my own PoC against HSBC will probably be longer than the space on the form.

[JonCris]

tamadus your concerns are well founded.

 

However there is one way to stop this happening & that it refuse to use the internet to conduct any borrowing business. Nothing but phones & hard copy.

 

I realize it might be inconvenient for many (including me) but they might then get the message & we the consumer would not be at risk from the crooks we know are out there

[tamadus]

I agree Jon but it will continue as long as enough people do it.

 

It's a bit like the price of petrol, they would soon lower it if nobody bought any for a week but in reality it's not going to happen.

[Smoothy]

I agree Jon but it will continue as long as enough people do it.

 

It's a bit like the price of petrol, they would soon lower it if nobody bought any for a week but in reality it's not going to happen.

 

 

Guess what dave........

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Supermarkets move to cut petrol

 

Sorry!!

Smoothy

[tamadus]

Guess what dave........

 

BBC NEWS | Business | Supermarkets move to cut petrol

 

Sorry!!

Smoothy

 

LMAO trust somebody.

 

Its not exactly the same as us demanding a substantial reduction by not buying it though which is what I meant. I also notice that OPEC intend pushing the wholesale price up anyway.

 

Considering petrol is a waste by-product from refining crude they make enough money from it.

[JonCris]

Perhaps we should mount a 'boycot the internet when dealing with the money lenders & their agents' (needs a better title) campaign. Great Idea for a new thread in the campaign forum. Anyone agree?

[tamadus]

Perhaps we should mount a 'boycot the internet when dealing with the money lenders & their agents' (needs a better title) campaign. Great Idea for a new thread in the campaign forum. Anyone agree?

 

I'm in full agreement with almost any campaign that means we can show consumer rejection of higher prices, especially where it is something that leaves us in such danger of fraud and abuse.

[Mike220359]

ok I need to quote the bit that says a company cannot profit while in default. Does anybody know EXACTLY where it is ? I need it fast for a BIG claim going into Barclaycard this weekend and I dont really have the time to troll through CPA,CCA etc etc right now

 

SEctions 77,78 & 85 all have it in writing, 'not allowed to enforce the agreement', by that all terms of the agreement from data distribution to interest application.

 

In addition, common law states that you are not allowed to profit from an illegal (or unlawful) act. Thats why the suicide law was repealed in the early sixties, because it was illegal to try or commit suicide, which precluded any insurance policy paying out.

 

Mike

[tamadus]

SEctions 77,78 & 85 all have it in writing, 'not allowed to enforce the agreement', by that all terms of the agreement from data distribution to interest application.

 

In addition, common law states that you are not allowed to profit from an illegal (or unlawful) act. Thats why the suicide law was repealed in the early sixties, because it was illegal to try or commit suicide, which precluded any insurance policy paying out.

 

Mike

 

Mike its that case law I need, the principle is well established now but I need to be able to quote it and all my searching has not come up with it.

 

It really is important as this case is going to lift the lid of a lot of cans full of worms when it hits.

[Smoothy]

Perhaps we should mount a 'boycot the internet when dealing with the money lenders & their agents' (needs a better title) campaign. Great Idea for a new thread in the campaign forum. Anyone agree?

 

 

How’s about No Applications Signed OnLine...

Only drawback is the acronym is N.A.S.O.L might get mistaken for a sinus remedy!!

But I totally agree... it’s about time consumers started fighting back in stead of rolling over and accepting practices that jeopardize their rights.

Smoothy

[JonCris]

You could always spell out the 1st word..........NO......A.S.O.L The telephone coversation with the money lender could go something like

 

Them/ "excuse me did you say your a member of the No Applications Signed on Line"

 

You/ "yes......No ASOL"

[tamadus]

You could always spell out the 1st word..........NO......A.S.O.L The telephone coversation with the money lender could go something like

 

Them/ "excuse me did you say your a member of the No Applications Signed on Line"

 

You/ "yes......No ASOL"

 

LMAO

 

no other comment needed